Say what you think - or not...

It's not generally realised that bloggers such as ourselves live in a climate where we can be sued for libel, reported to the Data Protection Commissioner or removed by the hosting company for speaking the truth.

"Surely not!" I hear you cry, but it is a fact that in the UK the cost of defending a libel claim in Britain — 140 times more than other countries, according to an Oxford University study — and the existence of super-injunctions, a court-obtained injunction that not only prohibits publication of information but also - alarmingly - prohibits publication of the mere fact that the injunction itself has been granted is slowly but inexorably removing free speech and hence freedom itself from the UK.

Private Eye reveals that last year Andrew Marr won an injunction to stop the media revealing “private information” about him – and to stop them revealing that he’d stopped them. Marr himself is on record arguing against a judge-made privacy law and calling for a public debate on the subject. Any such debate should include some reference to the effect of super-injunctions; yet Marr’s, like many others these days, was so draconian that one couldn’t mention its existence, nor the grounds it had been given.

The Sunday Times reports that an eminent Danish radiologist was sued in the London libel courts by GE Healthcare, the company that produces the drug and who has already spent nearly £400,000 in legal fees over the radiologist's presentation on his clinical experience of the dangerous side effects of a commonly used drug, Omniscan.

What these cases highlight is the growing tendency not only to suppress investigative journalism - on which many of our current freedoms depend - but also, and arguably far more dangerously, to stop scientists engaging in free debate and discussions on the risks associated with new and relatively untried medical treatments.

Things could be changing, however, and the Libel Reform campaign says they have concluded that English libel law has a negative impact on freedom of expression, both in the UK and around the world. Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right, and should only be limited in special circumstances. Yet English libel law imposes unnecessary and disproportionate restrictions on free speech, sending a chilling effect through the publishing and journalism sectors in the UK. This effect now reaches around the world, because of so-called 'libel tourism', where foreign cases are heard in London, widely known as a 'town named sue'. The law was designed to serve the rich and powerful, and does not reflect the interests of a modern democratic society.

Make sure you mention this to your MP when he asks for your vote.